Career CFO vents her frustration over business, human capital, economics, social environment, culture, politics, and everything else; but always with a monetary twist

April 2013 posts

April 29, 2013

"Yes, you are absolute right. I don't even know what value a college degree has today. My son is graduating from The University of Tampa this year. He is having problems securing an internship. The job search appears to be hopeless altogether. So, I am like 'Why don't you go back to school and learn some plumbing? Because I just paid $1,000 to get my toilet unclogged.'"

April 27, 2013

When I was a little girl, a preteen, a teenager, my parents always teased me, "Why are you crying? Feeling sorry for yourself?" I could've been weeping about some really heart-breaking moment in my life or over a beautiful passage in a book - it didn't matter, their reaction was always the same.

Well, if that was their way of toughening me up, it worked. But discouraging crying? Nah, their badgering wasn't successful - I'm still a crier. Blatant injustices, the disappearance of Earth's beauty, the unfairness of life; but also a goosebumpy music passage, a powerful piece of acting, an especially brilliant bit of storytelling, a rare instance of mesmerizing artistry - all are known to bring quick tears to my eyes.

But all these occasions allow me to cry secretly - in a privacy of my home; in the darkness of a theater; sometimes in the middle of a crowded place, where nobody knows me (which is the same as being alone); or in front of a few people (can count them on one hand), who are so close to me, most of the time we cry about the same things. To the rest of the world, however, I'm known as Marina of Steel, always composed and together. In fact, most people think that I am a gruff bitch. The mother-fuckers would probably have panic attacks if they saw me all snotty and whimpering - the way I get, when I fight with my daughter.

In my entire career there were only a few occasions, when, while in the office, I simply couldn't hold back tears - the ducts just acted on their own accord, the way they do when you get hit on the nose. One time, during a meeting, my CEO threw some reports straight into one of my subordinate's face, and I couldn't do anything about it: couldn't protect the victim, couldn't say anything to the boss - just had to watch it happening. I remember thinking, "God, if somebody else did that in front of me, I would've fucking slapped him. But I have to pretend that I'm paralyzed, because I need my job! It hurts!" And the tears just rolled out involuntary.

Nearly 20 years ago (God! I was still young then!), a different boss, always insecure about his origins and education, got angry with me, because he forgot to request some analysis he urgently needed, yet expected that I would telepathically infer his wishes. I was already a Controller and have accomplished some pretty amazing stuff for the company (for which, truth be told, I was very well compensated). So, I felt pretty secure to simply explain that he never asked for it. To this he retorted: "You're probably lying that you were always a straight A student. No doubt your mother bribed your teachers." There were other people around too, listening... The randomness and the absurdity of the insult hit me like a ton of bricks. I was lost for words and my eyes just swelled with tears. Nothing was to be done or said, of course - my family's well-being was much higher on my list of priorities than my self-esteem.

Just the other day, a business owner, who was my torturer-in-chief at that moment (he is the one who thinks himself a Good Boss), demanded some pretty serious piece of performance analytics to be delivered to him the next day, before his meeting with X. Considering the available resources, this was impossible to accomplish. So, I informed him accordingly. And yes, I'm too fed up with all this bullshit now, so I let a bit of a sarcasm escape me: "How long have you known about this meeting anyway?" I asked him. "Let me explained to you the idiocy (Miriam-Webster: extreme mental retardation) of this question," he replied and then embarked on a long-winded rant about... Well, who cares? And I wasn't listening anymore. I wanted to laugh, but somehow sparse teardrops started falling down instead. Thank God, I cried - at least it stopped his blabbering and he left the room.

Yeah, things like that... So, it's true - I cry because I feel sorry for myself. I'm sorry that my life is nothing what I hoped it would be. I'm sorry that I don't have enough time to do things that I truly love. I'm sorry that I always work harder than anybody else would in my place and the rewards never match my efforts. I'm sorry that I always work for people who are not sophisticated enough to understand my value and appreciate my contribution. I'm sorry that they always turn out to be insecure assholes. I'm sorry that, even though I held them in my hands, I let all the means of my personal security slip away. I'm sorry about so many of my choices that led me to where I am...

...What is that you are saying? A pity party? So what if it is? Nobody else pities me - everyone thinks that I'm some fucking stone.

April 23, 2013

Scientists studying the processes of human decision-making (the likes of psychologist Gerd Gigerenzer and physicist Leonard Mlodinow) build research institutes, conduct experiments, write books, and give lectures to support their argument that our subconsciousness, our "gut feelings," our intuition - whatever you prefer to call it, has a fundamental impact on the way we come to vital conclusions, resolve personal and professional problems, make split-second choices in high-pressure situations, and generally conduct ourselves on a daily basis. But do we really need this much theoretically-substantiated convincing?

Life provides us with tons of evidence everywhere we look. 99% of business decisions are based on some internal impulse (CFOs know it better than anyone). A private equity investor can read every word and weigh every digit of a 100-page incredibly rosy due diligence report and still say No to the prospective buy, because "something tells him" it's a bad lemon. The reason college dropouts like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Michael Dell became uber-successful businessmen is because they disregard the rules and follow their commercial instincts. The whole of the CIA analyzes volumes of intelligence data for years; then comes Carrie Mathison with the unequivocal trust in her own guts and points her finger out: "I love this ginger dude, but he is a fucking terrorist. I just know it."

Even after experiencing this phenomenon for decades myself, I am still surprised by the brain's ability to quickly come up with solutions to multi-faceted problems. Sometimes it seems that no mind's work goes into the formulation of a strategic move or an intricate design of a complex reporting system. How does it work inside my head? Is it intuition supported by vast professional expertise? Or does my brain sift very fast through the "evidence" in front of me, and if I took time to analyze the process I would be able to isolate each step of the neurological algorithm? And how is it that my hunches on whether an endeavor will be a success or a failure are most of the time spot-on? Hell, if I know!

The point is that most people experience the phenomenon of "unexplainable" knowledge and unsubstantiated trust into one's own intuition on a daily basis. How many times do you find yourself on either side of this exchange: "How did you know?"/ "I don't know, I just did." Or this one: "How did you figure this out?" "I don't know, it just came to me." Thousands? And we leave it at that: it's so common and acceptable, no further explanation is required.

In fact, we are so intimately familiar with the "gut feeling" that we unconditionally accept the concept of coming to conclusions through some obscure maze of subconscious clues as pure realism. Moreover, storytellers aspiring to create the ambiance of authenticity cannot ignore the intuitive nature of mental processes.

On the other hand, an impeccable logician with an ability of consciously processing numerous facts in a matter of seconds is usually seen as a phenom - in real life someone definitely "on the Spectrum," as they call it nowadays; or, in the creative realm, a stuff of legends, a mythological creature, a literary concoction, such as my beloved Sherlock Holmes. The unique abilities of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's creation are so fascinating, so magic-like that the detective extraordinaire has joined the ranks of undying archetypal characters (like Cyrano, or Peter Pan, or Romeo & Juliet) that get to be incarnated and reincarnated in different forms, substances, and environments.

Besides the numerous literary pastiches of Sherlock Holmes's "latter days" adventures, we are presentlyhave no less thanfive (!) screen variations of the famed deducing genius:

1. Guy Ritchie's lavishly budgeted and heavily CGI-ed big-screen adaptations featuring the full spectrum of Conan Doyle characters, with Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law topping the bill as Sherlock Holmes and his sidekick Dr. Watson. The movies are set in the meticulously recreated places and times taken straight from the author's pages.

2. The BBC's fabulous teaser Sherlock with painfully short seasons consisting of 3 feature-length episodes each. While still sticking to the original names, characterizations, and even the titles of individual stories, the series transplants Sherlock Homes, Dr. Watson (still an Afghan War veteran - some things never change), the criminal mastermind Moriarty, the seductress Irene Adler, the faithful Mrs. Hudson, et al. to technology-saturated 21st century London.

3. The CBS's freshly-minted (2012) network-sized (24 episodes per season) series Elementary, which not only puts the former Dr. Watson through a sex change, converting John into Joan (as depicted by Lucy Liu), but also gives the brilliant detective a much bigger playground by sending him to New York.

4. Also on CBS (would you believe it?!) is The Mentalist, already renewed for the sixth season. Most viewers don't even realize that they are watching a Sherlock-Holmes re-interpretation, because the main character's name is Patrick Jane and the series is set in present-day California, but I assure you that's what it is. Mr. Jane possesses all the required attributes, solving murders and bringing criminals to justice in every episode by sheer use of his mental power, noticing the most nuanced details in human behavior and logically reconstructing chains of events. While his sidekick, CBI special agent Lisbon, is also a female and has nothing to do with medicine, the creators did give Patrick an archenemy of the Moriarty caliber - the omnipresent and all-corrupting Red John.

5. And finally, The Mentalist's comedic counterpart - USA Networks' Psych, also set in the modern time, also in California (yet further South), also featuring a police consultant, and also hidden behind different names. Yet, the main character Shawn Spenser's power to see clues are so heightened that it's demonstrated to the audience in a laser-vision fashion. There is a new twist on the sidekick here as well - he is a childhood friend and an African-American, but professionally he is much closer to the modern ways of healthcare than doctors are - he sells pharmaceuticals.

Regardless of the time backdrop, the scenery, or the given names, all these characters stem from the same original stock cooked up by his lordship in his study - the ultra-brainy and obsessively detailed observers, who use their abilities to solve heinous crimes.

And that's why for a Sherlock Holmes aficionado like I, Guy Ritchie's Victorian escapades, in a way, seem like a betrayal of the myth, historical accuracy notwithstanding. Yes, Holmes was excellent in the boxing ring, proficient in Bartitsu, and good with the revolver, but it's the knife of his mind that dissected all those crimes - a weapon so unbelievably sharp that Conan Doyle felt it necessary to explain some of its potency with addictions to various drugs.

Interestingly enough, both the contemporary science of "gut feelings" and the Victorian creator of a mental-power archetype, in spite of the polarity of their foci, have at least one notion in common: Weighing too many learned facts pertaining to diverse branches of knowledge frequently slows down the process of arriving to a right conclusion. According to Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes deliberately discarded from his memory the childhood lessons of Earth's rotation around the Sun. He explains that for someone who relies on the Art of Detection, it's far more reasonable to accept the self-centered naked eye observation that our source of light rises on the East and goes down on the West, thus giving an appearance of moving.

In his books, Gigerenzer provides numerous examples showing that, statistically, people who know more about a subject matter come up with wrong solutions more frequently than those who rely on limited knowledge and intuition. Sometimes I wonder whether Einstein would be able to have his Relativity epiphanies if he was very good at integral and differential math.

And I have to say that the only thing that prevents me from drowning in the sea of the bookish knowledge I've absorbed over the years of advanced studying, is my persistent skepticism and an incurable disregard of "academic" authority. It is quite possible that this mental arrogance (hey, it is what it is) is the reason I'm still able to come up with some good ideas. After all, capable CFOs are not phantasmagorical characters with computers instead of brains in their heads. We are humans and, therefore, we should be able, from time to time, to let go of the educational dogma and allow the subliminal impulses, the gut feelings to take over.

April 22, 2013

Initiated into Free Masons Grand Lodge in 1909 at the age of 25; Grand Master since 1940

"I never did give anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell."

Harry S. Truman

33rd President of the United States

The Frustrated CFO's Comment:

I've been experiencing the same reaction to truths all my life as well. Then again, I've always said that generally truthful people can get away with the biggest lies. And nobody lies better than politicians do, especially those who really have something to hide.

April 16, 2013

So, that's how these people manage to live with their own shitty selves! They walk around with a clear conscience; with no doubt in their souls about their actions. They don't think about the injustices and the insults of different caliber they spread around with every step they take. They don't even qualify them as injusticies and insults. Instead, they pat each other on the backs and tell themselves that they are good bosses! Their self-delusion probably goes even further: I am terrified to think about it, but they might have convinced themselves that they are good people. Honestly, the idea of these people going through their lives thinking that they are saints makes my skin itch on the inside.

To tell you the truth, I prefer honest assholes, like the ones whose primary traits are itemized in the list provided by the Time's article attached on the bottom of this post. They are at least somewhat conscious of their attitudes and justify their behavior with the "business necessity." You know: A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do - that sort of thing. I also think that self-aware bastards are less casual with their cruelty. Unless they are real sadists, they apply it knowingly and, therefore, sparingly.

The conversation quoted in the title is not an allegory: I actually had the misfortune of witnessing it. I had to summon all my will power not to burst out laughing at these jerks. I've had pangs of suspicion that many business owners felt good about themselves, but this was the first time one of them actually voiced such self-deception in my presence. Why was it so bitterly funny? Because, the statement was prompted by their finally adapting a pension plan they promised their employees two years ago.

These are employers who pick favorites and treat them with an obvious preference, while discriminating against others. They forget to disclose new commercial initiatives, thus forcing everyone to run against time in order to turn their ideas into business realities. They will not hesitate to make a "good-natured" joke at an employee's expense or brazenly comment on someone's deficiency. The list can go on, and on, and on, and on... What can I say? Swell guys!

But let's see. What are (in my opinion) the attributes of a really Good Boss???

1. Fairness and objectivity; no bullshit like, "I don't like that bitch's personality, so I don't care if she's going to leave, even if it'll hurt my company."

2. Dedication to a merit-based system of rewards comprised of both tangible and moral incentives.

3. Intelligence and business acumen that perpetuates the company's success and keeps employees gratified that they don't work for an incompetent idiot.

4. High performance standards applied equally to everyone - first and foremost to his/her own work.

5. Capacity to fully comprehend the abilities and values of their direct reports.

12. And this one is just for me: For once in my life I would like to work for someone with a good memory, because I'm fucking fed up with their forgetting time after time the stuff I say, write, and report to them.

So, my dear business owners and other chiefs, try to test your performance against the criteria above and see how you do. None of the "good bosses" I know would score enough for a "D" grade.

April 15, 2013

"Everybody in this room is going be dead in a hundred years! When a baby dies, people get very sad. But a baby hasn't yet fallen in love with the world. When we've fallen in love with the world, then what do we do? It's absolutely awful."

April 08, 2013

It's like I said, the only way to make money if you are poor is to steal it or scam it. But, hey, let me know if the rules are changing..."

Shameless, episode 3.2

Written by Nancy Pimental

The Frustrated CFO's commentary:

If you take this opinion of a 17 year-old genius with a 4.6 GPA and an IQ of 200 out of its literal white-trash, destitute, semi-criminal settings, you will find the undeniable metaphorical truth in it. Both Lip (too wise for his age, thanks to the middle-aged screenwriter) and I are aware of the American Dream reality as it stands right now. No matter how talented and hard-working a person is, he or she will not be able to achieve the recognition his abilities merit if he doesn't have the "right" background and connections that can push complete retards through the doors closed to regular people. There is no such thing as a "self-made man" anymore. Most of the time those who say that about themselves mean that they had less money when they started then they have now. But no doubt there was a phone call, or a letter, or a conversation over drinks, or some old-farts reunion that gave him a start. Not even a degree from a fancy college can beat that. In the grand scheme of things, there is not much difference between Lip, Fiona, their father, a young talented doctor with a residency in some Bumblefuck, the first-in-the-family MBA, an artist or a writer with no connects, or me.

April 07, 2013

I am the biggest advocate of an entrepreneurial CEO's freedom from any administrative, technological, and infrastructural minutiae. They must not busy themselves with making their own reports or calculations in Excel, devising organizational routines, catering to bankers' demands, nurturing relationships with customers, etc. They have functional executives and senior management for that - CFOs, COOs, CIOs, Controllers, Sales VPs, etc.

An effectual CEO should be focused almost exclusively on the strategic development of the business and the tactical decisions pertaining to the company's survival and prosperity. Therefore, he may be, but doesn't need to be an Excel pro, an IT geek (unless, of course, that's the business), a bullshitting ace, or a financing maverick. He must be a visionary - that's all. I stated my position on this issue multiple times and dedicated an entire post to the defense of CEO's limited scope of responsibilities. I even wrote about it in CFO Techniques.

I have to say, though, when it comes to technology, for most CEOs outside of the high-tech industry, it's not even the result of division of labor -there's some sort of a pervasive impairment. Most business owners I know personally or have heard about from other people are not very technologically advanced, to put it mildly.

There are CEOs who call for help every time they need to insert a column in a table; are incapable of logging onto a network; and wouldn't touch scanners even if they stand right on their desks. And that's Ok. As I said, they don't have to trouble their valuable heads with these things as long as they attend to their primary job and manage to be brilliant at it.

However, we do live in the second decade of the 21st century and some level of sophistication in the ways of contemporary communication is simply required. It has nothing to do with being a small business owner, a big-time CEO, or The President. This is one area of technological advancement, where everyone at a certain point had to overcome their innate resistance to novelties and get on with the program. Radio, telegraph, telephone, video transmission, cellular connection, etc. - they have simply become mundane tools of every-day existence.

Nowadays, using electronics as a means of organizing your life and exchanging information is as elementary as turning the pages of an old-fashioned desktop calendar. And if you don't know how to do it, it makes you look silly and inadequate; it's simply unbecoming for a business leader.

I currently have a client who comes to the office on Saturdays and Sundays because he cannot follow instructions on how to access his business emails remotely or push them through his iPhone. His partners, employees, and commercial associates laugh about it behind his back. It's likely that these inadequacies have an impact on their overall attitudes towards this business owner.

But I am particularly annoyed with those CEOs who are not able to utilize Outlook beyond the most primitive actions of receiving and sending emails. I mean, for businesses operating in the PC environment, the program has become one of the most vital cross-functional tools since 1997!

I am currently exposed to one of these. At this point I've already resigned myself to the sad fact that she will never learn how to accept or reject meeting invitations. I wouldn't even dream of her creating one herself. She will never get rid of her humongous appointment book, which, due to its instrumental limitations, is incapable of reminding her of important events or tasks at hand. However, emails are her life, she lives and breathes them. Wouldn't she treat them with proper care? Guess again.

The other day she comes over to my office and asks if I still have "that email about..." (the subject matter is irrelevant). Of course, I do. She is standing right next to me looking at my screen, prepared to read the email with me when I find it. I switch to Outlook, which is opened, as always, on the Inbox. There are maybe 10 emails there, which arrived in the last 30 minutes. "Where are all the emails?!" she is utterly surprised, "I keep all important emails. I've got hundreds of them." "So do I," I reply, "But not in the Inbox, of course." I slide to my Navigation Pane, go straight to one of my 30 subject folders.

She is not stupid and she is a pretty good CEO. She understands the importance of time-saving tools. But she is too proud. She will not ask me or any of her employees how to do it. And so, she continues searching through hundreds of messages in her Inbox.

April 01, 2013

After reading my Means of Self-Therapy post from a week ago, some bleeding hearts felt obligated to ask me, "Why not conventional therapy?" I have to put my answer in a quote form, so that some TV addicts don't accuse me of plagiarism. This is what actually happened. I've been saying this shit for years and then one night, hit by insomnia, I accidentally stumbled on a random episode of The Mentalist, in which Patrick Jane (Simon Baker) repeated my sentiment about therapy (and doctors in general) verbatim. Whoa! It was eerie: the TV mentalist seemed to be a real mentalist, reading my mind.

"Psychiatrist: You don't like talking to doctors?

Jane: They always want to be the smartest person in the room, don't they? When in fact that's me, obviously."